Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Buddhism, Weddings And Marriage

Recently I looked up Wikipedia
to see what it says about marriage. What I found saddened although hardly surprise
me. Eleven paragraphs on Christianity, five on Islam, three lines on Buddhism. The
article ‘Buddhist View of Marriage’ is little better. The article ‘Weddings’
has exactly one sentence on Buddhism. Many Wikipedia articles are excellent,
but much of what it presents about Buddhism
is amateurish, superficial and sometimes wrong. Some subjects that Buddhism could have
something relevant to say ignore it completely. As millions of people now rely
on Wikipedia for the information they need, this problem can only reinforce the
perception of Buddhism as irrelevant and disengaged. This being so I am writing
something about Buddhism weddings and marriage. Wikipedia Buddhism editors
please take note pitijoy@yahoo.com

BUDDHISM, WEDDINGS AND MARRIAGE

As understood in most cultures,
marriage is the union of two persons which is recognized by some authority be
it religious, legal or social. There are and always have been many types of
marriage – polygamous and polyandrous, there are cousin marriages, forced
marriages, and in parts of the Islamic world temporary marriages. In some parts
of the Western world same-sex marriage has gained legal and social
acceptance.

Pre-Buddhist
India

The various law books of
Brahmanism, the main formal religion of the Buddha’s time, tell us much about
marriage customs and weddings ceremonies in India before the turn of the first
millennium. A girl had to be married off within a few months after her first
menstruation and a father who failed to do so incurred more blame as time
passed. There was a marriage season and the actual day and time of the wedding
was usually determined by astrology. The caste of the two families was a
crucial consideration. The two highest castes, Brahmans and the warrior caste
sometimes intermarried, but only rarely did either marry below this, and to
marry a sudra or an outcaste was
inconceivable.

Brahmanism recognized eight
forms of marriage, the most common being those arranged by the parents or
guardians and which usually included a payment. Less common but still
recognized were where the couple chose each other with the parents approval (Āsura), or where the couple married without their parent’s permission
(Gāndharvah).
This last type usually involved elopement. Abduction (Rāksasa) was allowed for the
warrior caste and sometimes resulted in violence. The Vajjians used to “abduct
others’ wives and daughters and compel them to live with them”, a custom the
Buddha considered socially harmful (D.II,74). Svayaṃara was a form of
marriage wherein usually a girl but sometimes a boy chose a partner from a
number of suitors. Such ceremonies would usually take place at a public
gathering. The last and lowest type, although still legal, the Paiśāca marriage,
involvedmarryingthe girl after having raped her while she was
asleep, drunk or otherwise unaware of what was happening. Apart from these
eight recognized marriages there were in fact several other forms of conjugal
arrangements. A slave or servant could gradually come to be treated as a wife,
a woman could consent to live with a man because he paid her to do so, and a
woman taken in war could become a wife.There was also what was known as a temporary wife (muhuttika, or taṃkhaṇika,Vin.III,139)
when a man and woman came together out of convenience and parted when either one of them wanted to
do so.

The Brahmanical wedding was
usually preceded by checking the genealogies of the two families and was always
conducted by a Brahman priest. While the wedding ceremony might differ slightly
in different regions they all shared two other common features. These were the
father of the girl joining the couple’s hands and the couple then taking seven
steps around the sacred fire. According to some law books the newlyweds were to
abstain from sex for at least three days after their marriage. As most couples
usually did not even see their future spouse until the wedding ceremony, this
would have given them at least some opportunity to get to know each other
before physical intimacy began.

There does not seem to have been
formal divorce in ancient India, at least during the Buddha’s time. If a man
was dissatisfied with his wife he simply took another one, sometimes keeping
his first wife or perhaps casting her out. The law books say a husband could
expel his wife if she was barren, unfaithful, cantankerous, chronically ill or
because had not produced a son within a certain number of years. In later centuries
the permission of some authority - a guild, the heads of the clan or the king,
was needed to divorce a wife. The Arthaśāstra advices
the king to grant divorces if both parties are unhappy with their
marriage.

It is worth pointing out that
the area of northern India where the Buddha lived, the MiddleLand, was by no means completely Brahmanized
during his time and would not become so for at least another few centuries.
Brahmanical and Hindu law books such as Manu
Smṛti, Yājñavalkya
Smṛti and the various Dharmasūtras, present the ideal, not necessarily the
actual situation, and their rules were not always enforced by state power.
Further, many communities and regions undoubtedly had their own wedding and
marriage traditions and took no notice of or sometimes opposed Brahmanism
teachings on marriage, weddings and other matters.

Buddhist
Weddings and Marriage

The Pāḷi
Tipiṭaka, the oldest record of the Buddha’s life and teachings, tell us
something about what the Buddha and the early Buddhists thought about weddings
and marriage and how they conducted them. The usual words for a wedding were maṅgalakiriyāor avahamaṅgala. Vivāha referred to the
arrangement where the girl was brought to the boy’s home and vivāhana
was when the boy went to the girl’s (D.I,99; I,11). In both cases this was done
to the accompaniment of music and dancing. Although the big day was probably
selected astrologically the Nakkhata Jātaka
mocks this practice as foolish (Ja.I257-8).

The Tipiṭaka says little about Prince
Siddhattha’s life before he became a wandering monk and nothing about his
marriage. We know that he was married because it mentions his wife, although
never names her, and make reference to his son Rāhula.
The Lalitavistata (1st
cent. BCE/2nd cent. CE), a literary account of the Buddha’s life,
describes him selecting his bride and marking his choice by giving the girl his
ring (aṅguleyyaka). Apparently the
giving of engagement rings had become a custom by that time although this
custom is not mentioned anywhere in the Tipiṭaka.

Influenced by the prevailing
social norms the first Buddhists probably married within their own caste. But
as the Buddha’s teachings of human equality started to have the effect in
breaking down caste barriers, this declined, at least within the Buddhist
community.The 12th chapter
of the Lalitavistata has the Buddha’s
father say that his son can marry even a low caste girl if she is virtuous. He
then adds:“He is not concerned with
caste or linage in a wife. He desires only virtue.”

There is no mention of child
marriage in the Tipiṭaka, nor did the Buddha say anything onthis matter. However, all mentions in the
Tipiṭaka of the age of girls being married range from 16 to 20, most being
closer to the former (patta soḷasa vassa
kalepattavaya, Ja.I,421). It was generally thought good for the bride
and groom to be the same age (tulyavaya). The only thing the Buddha said
concerning marital age was that it was inappropriate for men to marry women
much younger than themselves (Sn.110).

The Tipiṭaka preserves only
fragments of information about how the first Buddhistsconducted their wedding ceremonies. To
distinguish their weddings from those of Brahmanism it seems that the elders of
one or the other family conducted the marriage rather than having a Brahman
priest officiate. The essential feature of the ceremony was when the father of
the bride took her hand, put it in the groom’s hand and with a ceremonial vase
or pot(bhinkāra or kuṇdi) in his right hand
poured water over their joined hands.This event was called the Giving by Water (pānīpradāna) and marked the culmination of the marriage. The person
conducting the ceremony then imparted a benediction to the newly-wedded
couple.A benediction from the Jātaka goes: “May your friendship with your beloved
wife never decay” (Ajeyyaṃ esa tava hotu mettī bhariyaya kaccana
piyaya saddhiṃ). Seven days after the marriage monks were invited for a
meal.

Buddhist monks and nuns were
forbidden by their rules to act as go-betweens or matchmakers. However, they
were allowed to attend weddings. In fact, according to the Vinaya, if the
supporter of a particular monastic community invited a monk from that community
to attend his son’s or daughter’s wedding the monk was obliged to go (Vin.I,140).
It is not certain what role monks had in marriages, if indeed they had one.
Perhaps their presence was considered auspicious or that it added luster to the
proceedings. Perhaps they took the place of Brahmans in receiving gifts. It is
also possible that they gave a blessing to the newlyweds.

The
Buddha on Marriage

Having been both a
husband and a father, the Buddha was able to speak of marriage and parenthood
from personal experience. A husband, he said, should honour and respect his
wife, never disparage her, be faithful to her, give her authority and provide
for her financially. A wife should do her work properly, manage the servants,
be faithful to her husband, protect the family income and be skilled and diligent
(D.III,190). He said that a couple who are following the Dhamma will“speak loving words to each other” (aññamañña piyaṃvādā, A.II,59) and that “to cherish one’s children and wife is
the greatest blessing”(puttadārassasaṅgahoetaṃmaṅgalamuttamaṃ, Sn.262). He said
that “a good wife is the best companion” (bharyāva paramā sakhā,
S.I,37), and the Jātaka comments that a husband
and wife should live “with joyful minds, of one heart and in harmony” (pamodamānā ekacittā
samaggavāsaṃ, Ja.II,122). The Buddha
criticized theBrahmans for buying
their wives rather than “coming together in harmony and out of mutual
affection” (sampiyena pi saṃvāsaṃ samaggatthāya sampavattenti, A.III,222), making it clear
that he thought this a far better motive for marriage. “In this world, union
without love is suffering” says the Jātaka (lokismiṃ hi
appiyasampayogo va dukkha, Ja.II,205).

With some sympathy, the Buddha
described the discomfort of the newly-wedded bride.“When a young wife is led to her husband’s
home, either by day or night, for a while she feels great timidity and shyness
in the presence of her mother-in-law, her father-in-law, her husband and even
towards the servants and slaves.” (A.II,78)

Monogamy

The Tipiṭaka occasionally
mentions men having more than one wife. Probably only monarchs and the very
rich were polygamous. Although the Buddha did not advocate any particular form
of marriage, it can be assumed that he favoured monogamy. His father Suddhodana
had two wives and as
a prince he could have had several wives also, but he apparently chose to have
only one. In a discourse on marriage, the Buddha assumes monogamy, again
implying that he accepted this as the preferred form of marriage. In the Saṁyutta Nikāya he
said that if a woman lacks merit she might have to contend with a co-wife (sapattī,S.IV,249), and the Tipiṭaka occasionally
discusses the disadvantages of polygamy for women. “Being a co-wife is painful”
(Thi. 216), “A woman’s worst misery is to quarrel with her co-wives”
(Ja.IV,316). Such problems are confirmed by other ancient Indian literature
which describes thetensions and maneuverings
between several wives in the same household.

Togetherness through Many Lives

According to the
Buddha’s understanding, if a husband and wife love each other deeply and have
similar kamma, they may be able to renew their relationship in the next life
(A.II,61-2). He also said that the strong affinity two people feel towards each
other might be explained by them having had a strong love in a previous life. “By living together in the past and by affection in
the present, love is born as surely as a lotus is born in water”(Ja.II,235). This idea is elaborated in the Mahāvastu:
“When
love enters the mind and the heart is joyful, the intelligent man can say
certainty, ‘This woman has lived with me
before’.” (Mvu.III,185).

The Ideal Couple

The ideal Buddhist
couple would be Nakulapitā and Nakulamātā who were devoted disciples of the
Buddha and who had been happily married for many years. Once Nakulapitā told
the Buddha in the presence of his wife:“Lord, ever since Nakulamātā was brought to my home when I was a mere
boy and she a mere girl, I have never been unfaithful to her, not even in
thought, let alone in body” (A.II,61). On another occasion, Nakulamātā
devotedly nursed her husband through a long illness, encouraging and reassuring
him all the while. When the Buddha came to know of this, he said to Nakulapitā: “You have benefitted, good sir, you have
greatly benefitted, in having Nakulamātā full of compassion for you, full of
love, as your mentor and teacher” (anukampikā,
atthakāmā, ovādikā, anusasikā,
A.III,295-8). From the Buddhist perspective, these qualities would be the
recipe for an enduring and enriching relationship; faithfulness, mutual love
and compassion and being each other’s spiritual mentor and teacher.

Faithfulness

The Buddha pinpointed
faithfulness as one of the most important ingredients for a successful marriage. A husband should not, he said, be
unfaithful to his wife or a wife to her husband.A character in the Jātaka
says:“We do not transgress with
another’s wife and our wife does not transgress against us. We relate to
others’ partners as if we were celibate” (Mayañ ca bhariyaṃ nātikkamāma amhe ca bhariyā nātikkamanti aññatra tāhi brahma cariyaṃ carāma pe,Ja.IV,53). A good wife was praised in the Tipiṭaka as “true to one husband” (ekabhattakinī) and a good husband
could be similarly defined. The archetypical, devoted and loyal spouse in the
Buddhist tradition is Sambula, the wife of King Sotthisena. When he was struck
by a disfiguring disease and had to renounce the throne and go into the forest,
she ignored all his requests to stay behind and happily accompanied him in his
exile. With patience and love she nursed him
through and eventually cured him of his disease. When he doubted her
faithfulness and shunned her, she would still not abandon him. Eventually, he
recognized her faithfulness, apologized for not trusting her, and the two were
reconciled (Ja.V,88 ff).

Conjugal faithfulness and love
is an important theme of many other Jātakas
too. In one such story, a wife’s devotion to her husband saves him from the
machinations of an evil king, and in another, the Bodhisattva instructs a
husband to treat his dedicated and long-suffering wife with the respect she
deserves. In a particularly moving story, all the friends of a husband desert
him when he is confronted by a terrible monster, and even his wife’s courage
momentarily to falter. His pleas for help dispel her hesitation and she rushes
to his side saying: ‘Noble husband of sixty years, I shall not desert you. Even
the four corners of the Earth know that
you are most dear to me’ (Ja.II,341-4). Another story tells of a wife whose
willingness to die for her husband saves both of them from certain death
(Ja.III,184-7).

Same-sex Marriage

A same-sex marriage is a legally
recognized union between two people of the same gender, i.e. two homosexuals. Same-sex marriages
have only of late become legal in several European countries and in a few
states in the United States. However, such unions may have existed in some
parts of the ancient world, including in India. The Kāma Sūtra (4th century
CE) mentions marriages between men, although it is not clear if these were
performed by Hindu priests or were recognized by the state, probably not. In Yasodhara’s Jayamaṅgala (13thcentury?), a commentary on the Kāma Sūtra composed in
about the 13th century,it says: “Freemen of
this inclination (i.e. homosexuals) who reject women and can willingly do
without them because they love each other, get married, bound by a deep
trusting friendship.” Any close, long-term relationship, heterosexual or
homosexual, will endure and be fulfilling if the couple involved are faithful
to each other (D.III,190), speak loving words to each other (A.II,59), have compassion and love towards each other,
and look upon each other as their mentor and teacher (A.III,295-8).

What would be the Buddhist
attitude to such marriages? Buddhism sees marriage as a secular institution, an
arrangement between two people, and thus Buddhist monks or nuns do not perform
marriages, although they are often called upon to bless the couple either just
before or just after the marriage. Monks also often give short sermons and
chant a few suttas during the opening of new
businesses, at birthdays, funerals and at the bedside of the sick or the dying.
If two men or two women were genuinely committed to each other and wanted a
monk to bless their union and wish them well in their life together, it is not
difficult to imagine that he would be happy to do this for them.

Divorce

There does not seem to be a word
in the Tipiṭaka for divorce,
other than perhaps vikiraõa meaning ‘to break’ or ‘to
separate’, which is sometimes used in
reference to marriage (e.g. D.I,11). According to the Vinaya, “being told ‘Enough!’.” (alaṃvacanīyā) by one’shusband was the usual way ofdissolvingamarriage during the Buddha's time (Vin.III,144).

When someone was dissatisfied
with their spouse, one or the other would either depart or be expelled from the
household. It was usually the wife who did this or to whom this was done. When
Ugga decided that he was going to become celibate he informed his four wives
that they could continue to live in the house, return to their parents or take
another husband. The eldest wife apparently already has her eye on another man
and asked to be given to him, which Ugga happily did (A.IV,210). Isidāsī and her husband lived in his parent’s house. He was unhappy
with her so he left the house and resided somewhere else. Isidāsī returned to her parent's house and they subsequently
married her off to another man (Thi.413-20). The Buddha said nothing about
divorce. When Sangāmaji decided to
become a monk he simply abandoned his house and his pregnant wife. After his
wife gave birth she took the baby to Sangāmaji
but he refused to acknowledge either her or the child (Ud.5-6).

The Buddha said nothing about
divorce.

Adultery

Adultery (aticariyā) is having sexual relations with another
person while married or with a person married to another. Until recently it was the major reason for
divorce. In the Tipiṭaka, a male adulterer is
called a paradārika
and a female equivalent is called aticārinī(S.II,259).
An adulteress might also be dubbed “an owl-like one” (kosiyāyayanī)
because she was thought to sneak around at night (Ja.I,496). Adultery is
probably the most common breach of the third Precept. Most marriage ceremonies
include a solemn promise by both parties that they will be faithful to each
other. Committing adultery breaks this promise and usually involves other
negative behaviours such as lying, deceit and pretence. The negative results of
adultery on others can include destruction of trust, humiliation, heartbreak
and a weakening of family cohesion. For these reasons, the Buddha said: “Being dissatisfied with his wife, if one is
seen with prostitutes or the wives of others, this is a cause of one’s decline”
(Sn.108).

Buddhist
Weddings and Marriages through History

It seems that
throughout history most ordinary Buddhists have usually been monogamous,
although kings were sometimes polygamous and fraternal polyandry was common in
Tibetuntil just recently. In the
highlands of Sri Lanka during the medieval period polyandry was practiced, and
it still is in parts of Ladakh and Spiti. Today, monogamy is the only legally
accepted form of marriage in all Buddhist countries. There is no specific
Buddhist wedding ceremony; different countries have their own customs which
monks usually do not perform or participate in. However, just before or after
the wedding the bride and groom often go to a monastery to receive a blessing
from a monk.

Abbreviations

All references are to the
volume number (Roman numerals) and page number (Arabic numerals) or where
relevant to verse numbers of the Pali Text Society’s editions of the Pali
Buddhist scriptures.

Excellent article on the topic yet somewhat sanitized. Tt states "Buddha’s teachings of human equality started to have the effect in breaking down caste barriers" and "Buddha criticized the Brahmans for buying their wives rather than coming together in harmony and out of mutual affection (A.III,222)". Yet A.III,222 also criticized Brahmins for marrying non-Brahmins, which shows the Buddha was not breaking down caste barriers (i.e., if we really believe the Buddha actually spoke those 'Brahmin-bashing' words in A.III,222). Also, the Sigalovada Sutta does mention 'child marriage' since it states parents "arrange a suitable marriage" for their children. In other words, it does not provide scope for a period of pre-marital sex & sowing wild oats. Also, the suttas (eg. Dhammapada 242) solely criticise women for having a sexual partner other than their husbands yet the definition of sexual misconduct is male-centred and allows scope for a man to have sex with women other than his wife.

Dear Barbarra, Ken and Vesakha, thanks to each of you for your comments. There seems little doubt that the Buddha’s teaching was an important factor in breaking down caste. He did indeed praise brahmans for marrying only within their own caste,but, it seems to me, only because those that did were not being hypocrites in that at least they were doing what they taught they were supposed to do. Next. I restate my position that there is no reference to child marriage in the Tipitaka. The passage you mention in the Sigalovada Sutta uses the word putta which can mean broadly child or generally son. Here it means son because of the passage “find him a suitable wife” (patirupena darena samyojenti). But just as the English ‘son’ is not age-specific (“My son has just had his 30th birthday”) neither is the Pali. The word boy (pre-pubescent or early teens) is usually balaka or daraka. It is not clear how your statement “In other words, it does not provide scope for a period of pre-marital sex & sowing wild oats” relates to child marriage. Please be more clear so I can comment,if necessary. To assume that because the Buddha’s language is often gender-specific (as was most of ours until just recently) and therefore “allows scope for men to have sex with women other than their wives” is, I think, being a bit too literal. Right now I am half-way through book written in the 60’s and one passage says: “All men eventually die.” If I were to take this to mean that the author does not believe or is trying to imply that females never die, I think you would quite justified in considering me a bit pedantic and a bit silly. At A.V,264 the Buddha enumerates the females a male should not have sex with. He was addressing a male audience but if he had been addressing audience of women he would have enumerated the female equivalents. Are you saying that a serious and sincere male Buddhist could honestly feel that the Buddha would countenance him committing adultery and being sexual promiscuous simply because he often couched his ideas in male-centred language? Come on Barbarra! Let’s be sensible about this. “The Tathagata uses the names, linguistic conventions, expressions and designations commonly used in the world but is misled by them” (D.I,202) and we should do the same. When I wrote that “there is no specific Buddhist wedding ceremony” I did not mean that there is no such ceremony’s but that there is no same or similar ceremony used across the different Buddhist countries, as there is say within Catholicism. To the best of my knowledge every Buddhist culture has its own distinct weddings. However, I would be interested to know whether the Japanese ceremony you mention is a traditional one, or a recent creation. Any information concerning this?

A.V,264 enumerates the females a male should not have sex with. This provides scope for men to have sex with women other than a sole wife, such as their other wives, concubines, etc. Often men had more than one wife, such as Ratthapala. Where as a woman can only have sex with her one husband. This is the teaching per Dhammapada 242.

I suppose that A.V,264 could have been interpreted as allowing a male to play the field and some men may have used it as an excuse to do so. If one is determined to do or get something one can read or misread any text to suit oneself. But put together, the overwhelming impression Buddhist texts give concerning sex is one of restraint, continence and moderation - for men and women. But if you wish to believe that the Buddha encouraged men to be sexually promiscuous you are free to do so.

BabarraBay, norms change with place and time. What's acceptable conduct can become misconduct at other places and at another age. There is no unchanging norm regarding sexual conduct within any society, quite clearly. Unlike theistic religions, Buddhism does not set the norms in this regard, society does. To my mind, A.V,264 refers to the norms of the day, which Buddhists observe. For example, if the norms of the day say one can sleep with several men as it pleases the woman(I understand it is still being practised by a Buddhist racial minority in Yunnan), then the Buddhist can do so without being regarded as committing sexual misconduct. Why must the Buddhist observe social norms of the day in this regard? I think it is that if expectations of one's conjugal partner(s) are broken, it will lead to mental anguish and suffering. But clearly the Buddhist teaching is that sexual lust and desire have to be tamed, and to become celibate for those who want to go all the way. That will be conducive to the attainment of the goal in Buddhism, the liberation of the mind.

It is well established rubbish that Siddhartha chose or favored monogamy. Etienne Lamotte has done some work in this field, which is published in the foot notes of Shurangama Samadhi Sutra. Theravada latched on Yashodhra as his only wife, and Lalitavistara sutra also mentions only one wife, but her name is Gopa! A third wife is also known by name, I forget the name now, but it is somewhere in the Vinayas of the Sravakaya schools, other than Theravada, says Lamotte. Two wives of Siddhartha are mentioned by name in the tibetan lineage history book the Blue Annals. Then there is the question of concubines, Sarvastivada school mentions them, as do some of the tibetan histories of Siddhartha. And their numbers run in thousands. Siddhartha's professed monogamy is a modern adaptation of Buddhism, it is protestant culture influenced forgetfulness..

Always happy to be informed that Pali suttas and commentaries are rubbish and that we should defer to a later Sanskrit sutra and a Belgian scholar of the mid-20th century. I guess there is just nothing more to say when we have the definitive word from the Tibetan history book the Blue Annals. Thanks very much for setting us all straight. If you detect a bit of sarcasm here, please just ignore it. You must be right and there's nothing more to say.

This wikipedia article is great work! It is at a risk of being removed though, because of providing only primary religious sources (the Tipitaka). Perhaps Ven. Dhammika has some sources that discuss the Tipitaka, that can be referred to as well?

Please note that I personally think the Tipitaka is a great source of information, but Wikipedia editors might think that such primary sources are generally open to discussion and interpretations, and therefore not valid by itself without secondary sources.

Dear Bhante, s.o. has removed the article because he suspected copyright infringement (he found the text also in the Sunday Times). As I have lost your email (mine is schnippschnupp (at) yahoo.de) I will try to contact you through the BDMS and send you the "declaration" that they usually require.

Do the Suttas mention anything about three phenomena: 1. sexually-open marriages? 2. polyamory?3. co-habitation without marriage?

In sexually open-marriages, there is no promise of sexual-exclusiveness (which means adultery - the breaking of a promise of sexual-exclusiveness - is not applicable) or at least later on the parties in the marriage decided to change it to one of sexual-openness. Within Moral Philosophy, there does not seem to be any moral-wrong with such open-marriages.

There are swing-events even in Singapore (it was featured in one newspaper many years ago) where married couples gather to exchange spouses for sex.

Dear Reasonable, sorry for the delay in replying to your question. I have been away and am just now back. The Buddha does not comment on any of the relationships you mention and none of them are specifically mentioned in the text. However, there is no doubt that powerful men sometimes married more than one wife and that these were publically acknowledged to be his wives. Likewise kings often had harems apart from their recognized wives. Even in the west, and despite Christianity’s strong insistence on monogamy, relationships existed that would qualify as sexually open marriages, polyamory and co-habitation. To take one of but many examples, Louis XIV was married to Maria Theresa of Spain while having relationships with at least nine other woman (mostly not all at the same time) and that most of these liaisons were public knowledge, tolerated by his wife and he apparently genuinely loved some of them while also loving his wife. To put it in evolutionary terms, ‘the dominate male has access to the females’. What would the Buddha have said about such arrangements? Probably: Overindulgence!’ There are swinger events in Singapore? Goodness! Perhaps the country is not as boring as I have thought.

Dear Reasonable, Though the Venerable has pointed out that there is no references in the Buddhist scriptures to the three issues, the Buddhist should know what is preferable or good for himself, his loved ones, his family and others in the context of the society he lives in.

If you’re reading this e-mail right now, then chances are your marriage isn’t what it used to be… and maybe it’s so bad, that you feel like your world is falling apart.

You feel like all the passion, the love, and romance have completely faded.

You feel like you and your wife can’t stop yelling at each other.

And maybe you feel that there’s almost nothing you can do to save your marriage, no matter how hard you try.

But you’re wrong.

You CAN save your marriage — even if your wife says she wants to get a divorce. You CAN rebuild that passion you felt for one another when you first kissed. And you can bring back that love and devotion you felt for one another when both of you said, “I love you” for the first time.

If you feel like your marriage is worth fighting for, then do yourself a favour and watch this quick video that will teach you everything you need to know about salvaging the most important thing in the world:

About Me

I am not the 5th or 9th reincarnation of a great lama, I have not recived any empowerments or initiations, I am not the holder of any lineage, I am yet to attain any of the jhanas, I am not a widely respected teacher, I am not a stream enterer (at least I don't feel like one)and I do not have many disciples. Nontheless, you may find some of my observations and musings interesting. I have been a Buddhist monk for 32 years and am the spiritual advisor to the Buddha Dhamma Mandala Society in Singapore.